This New York Times Article Didn’t Help Clinton

The New York Times recently published an article supporting Hillary and blaming Bernie for the fact that people don’t seem more excited about her presidency. I think they’ve got it wrong. Hillary and Bernie are in this together, more than anyone realizes.

I say this because I’ve learned that the people telling us to write in Bernie’s name are the same ones who were promoting Jill Stein in the primary. Only now they’re claiming it won’t make any difference to Hillary if people write in Bernie’s name in seven states. As usual they’re being disingenuous because at the same time they’re telling voters in the other states to vote for Stein. They just don’t quit!

Curiously the Stein supporters were the first to turn on Bernie after the convention, and they did so in a way that I think casts doubt on their former support for him. One of the YouTubers even went so far as to tell her viewers not to join Bernie’s revolution. If all she wanted was to get her candidate elected you’d think Bernie’s exit would make her happy, but for some reason she’s still obsessed with him.

Many of us former Bernie supporters are voting for Hillary. On the other hand the Stein supporters (who claimed to be Bernie supporters in the primary) are some of Clinton’s loudest critics today. In my opinion this is not an act of loyalty to Bernie. It’s an act of defiance.

Although the New York Times thought it would be helpful to the Clinton campaign to blame Bernie, I hope Hillary understands what an asset he is for her campaign and for the Democratic Party.